Auditor-General's Report

The Hon. R.I. LUCAS (15:46): The Auditor-General has, this year, in an almost unprecedented fashion, led his report with a significant concern and complaint about a decision taken by Premier Weatherill and the Weatherill Labor government. This particular cry for help from the Auditor-General clearly demonstrates that we have the most secretive premier, the most secretive cabinet and the most secretive government in the state's history. The Auditor-General highlights that Mr Weatherill and the government decided in September of this year to restrict access from the Auditor-General to cabinet submissions. He says:

…I was advised that Cabinet had approved a policy that information on Cabinet decision-making, including Cabinet submissions and notes and comments and advice provided relevant to Cabinet documents will not be provided to investigative agencies.

He goes on to outline that what he will have to do in the future is actually seek permission for each and every document from the cabinet and that the cabinet would then have to make a decision as to whether or not it would decide to release particular documentation.

When one looks at recent Auditor-General's reports to see the significance of this particular new policy, it is quite apparent. In recent reports on Gillman, the new Royal Adelaide Hospital, the EPAS IT system, the information and communications technology report (ICT report) and the Camden Park distribution centre report, the Auditor-General has relied significantly on cabinet submissions and cabinet documentation to raise and outline his concerns about public administration, government expenditure and governance generally of these critical issues.

I note also that, in relation to Gillman, where there was significant criticism from the Auditor-General and reliance on cabinet documents, similarly, the ICAC report by Commissioner Lander and also the Supreme Court decision were areas where access to cabinet documents was allowed and these were significant parts of the decisions taken by the ICAC and the judge in the Supreme Court decision relating to Gillman. Any of us who have had dealings with FOI will know that this particular decision is wideranging. It does not just relate to cabinet submissions.

I repeat again that it says 'notes and comments and advice provided relevant to cabinet documents'. There have been literally hundreds of documents refused to opposition members over the years which were not actually cabinet submissions but where the reason for refusing access to the documentation was that the department claimed that it was advice provided in the early stages of preparing a cabinet submission. So, the department might be working on an issue. It might not actually be the wording of the cabinet submission but the general issue, and that documentation is refused because the department argues that it is relevant to a decision of the cabinet.

It is clear that this is a deliberate attempt by Premier Weatherill and the Weatherill government to shackle the operations of the Auditor-General. It is clear that it is a deliberate attempt to restrict the ability of the Auditor-General to undertake the job that the parliament, as outlined in the Public Finance and Audit Act, has given him and his officers to do in terms of ensuring public accountability and transparency.

Clearly, the Premier and the government must have something to hide to go to such extreme lengths to try to shackle the operations of the Auditor-General in this unprecedented way. Clearly, the Premier and the cabinet have something to hide on a particular decision or a range of decisions leading into the 2018 state election which they do not want to get out, and they are going to stymie, stifle, hold up and restrict in whatever way they can the ability of the Auditor-General to do the job that he is required to do. Clearly, the Premier and the government are literally terrified that something is going to get out between now and the next election, and that is why they have introduced this particular policy.

I am pleased that the Auditor-General will be appearing before the Budget and Finance Committee early next year when the Budget and Finance Committee will have a look at how this particular decision will impact on his ability to do the job that he is required to do and ask him how it conflicts with the requirements under the Public Finance and Audit Act. In summary, I think all we can say here of the government is they have embarked on a full-frontal assault on democracy in South Australia and on the ability of the Auditor-General to ensure both the transparency and accountability of this government.